The judge overseeing the 'David Sánchez case', Beatriz Biedma, has officially sent the matter to the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Extremadura (TSJExt).

This decision follows the revelation that one of the individuals under investigation, Miguel Ángel Gallardo, the secretary general of the PSOE in Extremadura, was granted parliamentary status on May 21, thereby acquiring the legal privilege of aforamiento, which limits judicial authority over him to the TSJExt.

Gallardo received his official credentials as a deputy less than a day before Biedma issued a separate ruling that implicated him and other parties in the case, including David Sánchez, a musician and brother of Pedro Sánchez, the Prime Minister of Spain.

The judge has accused Gallardo of engaging in what she describes as a 'fraude de ley' or legal fraud in order to secure this parliamentary exemption.

To obtain his parliamentary position, Gallardo's close associate, Maricruz Vegazo Rodríguez, resigned from her parliamentary candidacy.

Furthermore, five other candidates officially renounced their candidacies before a notary to facilitate Gallardo's ascension to the Assembly.

In her latest ruling, Judge Biedma criticized Gallardo for what she characterizes as a deliberate maneuver to postpone judicial proceedings.

She emphasized that the swift formalities of the resignations raise concerns of legal impropriety.

In a comprehensive 102-page document, the judge outlined evidence against Gallardo, highlighting his tenure as president of the Diputación de Badajoz at the time David Sánchez was awarded a position there in 2017. Biedma suggests that Sánchez's appointment may have been influenced by familial connections rather than merit.

The TSJExt now faces the decision of whether to take jurisdiction over only the aspects of the case concerning Gallardo or the entire scope of the investigation, which includes charges against David Sánchez and the others involved.

Biedma's detailed ruling further discusses the implications of aforamiento in Spanish law, describing it as an 'absolute exception' compared to legal practices in other jurisdictions.

She referenced the Council of Europe’s suggestions for Spain to eliminate such parliamentary privileges, especially involving politicians suspected of corruption.

Notably, several autonomous communities in Spain have already removed such protections from their statutes.

The judge noted that had a proposed bill from 2018 been passed to limit aforamiento to crimes committed in the course of official duties, Gallardo would not be facing the current charges because the actions in question occurred before his election as a deputy.

Biedma scrutinized the timing of Gallardo's election to the Assembly, underlining that it occurred after the conclusion of the investigation, and suggested it may have been a strategic decision to resist prosecution.

She criticized the manner of the five candidates' resignation, emphasizing that their coordinated withdrawal was 'very significant' and likely intended to benefit Gallardo’s parliamentary bid.

The judge remarked that using public institutions for personal gain contradicts the principles of public service and the rule of law.

Furthermore, she expressed concern that Gallardo’s sudden status as an aforado would lead to procedural delays in the ongoing case proceedings, as the matter will now escalate to a higher judicial authority.

The ruling implies that the path forward for this case will involve navigating complex legal frameworks and potential jurisdictional challenges related to Gallardo's new status.